Aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole versus clopidogrel for recurrent stroke

Background Recurrent stroke is a frequent, disabling event after ischemic stroke. This study compared the efficacy and safety of two antiplatelet regimens — aspirin plus extendedrelease dipyridamole (ASA–ERDP) versus clopidogrel. Methods In this double-blind, 2-by-2 factorial trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive 25 mg of aspirin plus 200 mg of extended-release dipyridamole twice daily or to receive 75 mg of clopidogrel daily. The primary outcome was first recurrence of stroke. The secondary outcome was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from vascular causes. Sequential statistical testing of noninferiority (margin of 1.075), followed by superiority testing, was planned. Results A total of 20,332 patients were followed for a mean of 2.5 years. Recurrent stroke occurred in 916 patients (9.0%) receiving ASA–ERDP and in 898 patients (8.8%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.11). The secondary outcome occurred in 1333 patients (13.1%) in each group (hazard ratio for ASA–ERDP, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.07). There were more major hemorrhagic events among ASA–ERDP recipients (419 [4.1%]) than among clopidogrel recipients (365 [3.6%]) (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.32), including intracranial hemorrhage (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.83). The net risk of recurrent stroke or major hemorrhagic event was similar in the two groups (1194 ASA–ERDP recipients [11.7%], vs. 1156 clopidogrel recipients [11.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.11). Conclusions The trial did not meet the predefined criteria for noninferiority but showed similar rates of recurrent stroke with ASA–ERDP and with clopidogrel. There is no evidence that either of the two treatments was superior to the other in the prevention of recurrent stroke. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00153062.

Exposure-Response Model of Subcutaneous C1-Inhibitor Concentrate to Estimate the Risk of Attacks in Patients With Hereditary Angioedema

Subcutaneous C1-inhibitor (HAEGARDA, CSL Behring), is a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved, highly concentrated formulation of a plasma-derived C1-esterase inhibitor (C1-INH), which, in the phase III Clinical Studies for Optimal Management in Preventing Angioedema with Low-Volume Subcutaneous C1-inhibitor Replacement Therapy (COMPACT) trial, reduced the incidence of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks when given prophylactically. Data from the COMPACT trial were used to develop a repeated time-to-event model to characterize the timing and frequency of HAE attacks as a function of C1-INH activity, and then develop an exposure-response model to assess the relationship between C1-INH functional activity levels (C1-INH(f)) and the risk of an attack. The C1-INH(f) values of 33.1%, 40.3%, and 63.1% were predicted to correspond with 50%, 70%, and 90% reductions in the HAE attack risk, respectively, relative to no therapy. Based on trough C1-INH(f) values for the 40 IU/kg (40.2%) and 60 IU/kg (48.0%) C1-INH (SC) doses, the model predicted that 50% and 67% of the population, respectively, would see at least a 70% decrease in the risk of an attack

Long-Term Outcomes with Subcutaneous C1-Inhibitor Replacement Therapy for Prevention of Hereditary Angioedema Attacks

Background For the prevention of attacks of hereditary angioedema (HAE), the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous human C1-esterase inhibitor (C1-INH[SC]; HAEGARDA, CSL Behring) was established in the 16-week Clinical Study for Optimal Management of Preventing Angioedema with Low-Volume Subcutaneous C1-Inhibitor Replacement Therapy (COMPACT). Objective To assess the long-term safety, occurrence of angioedema attacks, and use of rescue medication with C1-INH(SC). Methods Open-label, randomized, parallel-arm extension of COMPACT across 11 countries. Patients with frequent angioedema attacks, either study treatment-naive or who had completed COMPACT, were randomly assigned (1:1) to 40 IU/kg or 60 IU/kg C1-INH(SC) twice per week, with conditional uptitration to optimize prophylaxis (ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT02316353). Results A total of 126 patients with a monthly attack rate of 4.3 in 3 months before entry in COMPACT were enrolled and treated for a mean of 1.5 years; 44 patients (34.9%) had more than 2 years of exposure. Mean steady-state C1-INH functional activity increased to 66.6% with 60 IU/kg. Incidence of adverse events was low and similar in both dose groups (11.3 and 8.5 events per patient-year for 40 IU/kg and 60 IU/kg, respectively). For 40 IU/kg and 60 IU/kg, median annualized attack rates were 1.3 and 1.0, respectively, and median rescue medication use was 0.2 and 0.0 times per year, respectively. Of 23 patients receiving 60 IU/kg for more than 2 years, 19 (83%) were attack-free during months 25 to 30 of treatment. Conclusions In patients with frequent HAE attacks, long-term replacement therapy with C1-INH(SC) is safe and exhibits a substantial and sustained prophylactic effect, with the vast majority of patients becoming free from debilitating disease symptoms

Aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole versus clopidogrel for recurrent stroke

Background Recurrent stroke is a frequent, disabling event after ischemic stroke. This study compared the efficacy and safety of two antiplatelet regimens — aspirin plus extendedrelease dipyridamole (ASA–ERDP) versus clopidogrel. Methods In this double-blind, 2-by-2 factorial trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive 25 mg of aspirin plus 200 mg of extended-release dipyridamole twice daily or to receive 75 mg of clopidogrel daily. The primary outcome was first recurrence of stroke. The secondary outcome was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from vascular causes. Sequential statistical testing of noninferiority (margin of 1.075), followed by superiority testing, was planned. Results A total of 20,332 patients were followed for a mean of 2.5 years. Recurrent stroke occurred in 916 patients (9.0%) receiving ASA–ERDP and in 898 patients (8.8%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.11). The secondary outcome occurred in 1333 patients (13.1%) in each group (hazard ratio for ASA–ERDP, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.07). There were more major hemorrhagic events among ASA–ERDP recipients (419 [4.1%]) than among clopidogrel recipients (365 [3.6%]) (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.32), including intracranial hemorrhage (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.83). The net risk of recurrent stroke or major hemorrhagic event was similar in the two groups (1194 ASA–ERDP recipients [11.7%], vs. 1156 clopidogrel recipients [11.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.11). Conclusions The trial did not meet the predefined criteria for noninferiority but showed similar rates of recurrent stroke with ASA–ERDP and with clopidogrel. There is no evidence that either of the two treatments was superior to the other in the prevention of recurrent stroke. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00153062.

Telmisartan to prevent recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events

Background Prolonged lowering of blood pressure after a stroke reduces the risk of recurrent stroke. In addition, inhibition of the renin–angiotensin system in high-risk patients reduces the rate of subsequent cardiovascular events, including stroke. However, the effect of lowering of blood pressure with a renin–angiotensin system inhibitor soon after a stroke has not been clearly established. We evaluated the effects of therapy with an angiotensin-receptor blocker, telmisartan, initiated early after a stroke. Methods In a multicenter trial involving 20,332 patients who recently had an ischemic stroke, we randomly assigned 10,146 to receive telmisartan (80 mg daily) and 10,186 to receive placebo. The primary outcome was recurrent stroke. Secondary outcomes were major cardiovascular events (death from cardiovascular causes, recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, or new or worsening heart failure) and new-onset diabetes. Results The median interval from stroke to randomization was 15 days. During a mean followup of 2.5 years, the mean blood pressure was 3.8/2.0 mm Hg lower in the telmisartan group than in the placebo group. A total of 880 patients (8.7%) in the telmisartan group and 934 patients (9.2%) in the placebo group had a subsequent stroke (hazard ratio in the telmisartan group, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86 to 1.04; P = 0.23). Major cardiovascular events occurred in 1367 patients (13.5%) in the telmisartan group and 1463 patients (14.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.01; P = 0.11). New-onset diabetes occurred in 1.7% of the telmisartan group and 2.1% of the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.04; P = 0.10). Conclusions Therapy with telmisartan initiated soon after an ischemic stroke and continued for 2.5 years did not significantly lower the rate of recurrent stroke, major cardiovascular events, or diabetes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00153062.

Thrombolysis with alteplase 3 to 4.5 hours after acute ischemic stroke.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase is the only approved treatment for acute ischemic stroke, but its efficacy and safety when administered more than 3 hours after the onset of symptoms have not been established. We tested the efficacy and safety of alteplase administered between 3 and 4.5 hours after the onset of a stroke. METHODS: After exclusion of patients with a brain hemorrhage or major infarction, as detected on a computed tomographic scan, we randomly assigned patients with acute ischemic stroke in a 1:1 double-blind fashion to receive treatment with intravenous alteplase (0.9 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo. The primary end point was disability at 90 days, dichotomized as a favorable outcome (a score of 0 or 1 on the modified Rankin scale, which has a range of 0 to 6, with 0 indicating no symptoms at all and 6 indicating death) or an unfavorable outcome (a score of 2 to 6 on the modified Rankin scale). The secondary end point was a global outcome analysis of four neurologic and disability scores combined. Safety end points included death, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and other serious adverse events. RESULTS: We enrolled a total of 821 patients in the study and randomly assigned 418 to the alteplase group and 403 to the placebo group. The median time for the administration of alteplase was 3 hours 59 minutes. More patients had a favorable outcome with alteplase than with placebo (52.4% vs. 45.2%; odds ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.76; P=0.04). In the global analysis, the outcome was also improved with alteplase as compared with placebo (odds ratio, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.65; P<0.05). The incidence of intracranial hemorrhage was higher with alteplase than with placebo (for any intracranial hemorrhage, 27.0% vs. 17.6%; P=0.001; for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, 2.4% vs. 0.2%; P=0.008). Mortality did not differ significantly between the alteplase and placebo groups (7.7% and 8.4%, respectively; P=0.68). There was no significant difference in the rate of other serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with placebo, intravenous alteplase administered between 3 and 4.5 hours after the onset of symptoms significantly improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke; alteplase was more frequently associated with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00153036.)status: publishe